The California is a car filled with firsts for Ferrari: the first front-engine V-8, the first use of direct injection, the first seven-speed transmission, the first true launch-control system, the first retractable hardtop, and the first stacked exhaust. But fear not, all these firsts have not changed the purity of Ferrari; they've just expanded its range.

There have been front-engine sixes and 12s, but this is the first front-engine eight and with it Ferrari has managed to make the entry-level California a true supercar in every sense of the word. The direct injection helps improve mileage and decrease emissions but because the California is heavier than the F430 it shares its engine architecture with, the tuning is optimized to boost torque by 14 lb-ft at the expense of 29 horsepower, for a total of 454 hp and 357 lb-ft.The Getrag dual-clutch seven-speed automated manual gearbox is nothing short of absolute perfection, worlds better than the old single-clutch F1 automated manual found in most current Ferraris. The speed in which shifts are made has always been a bragging point for the Italians, and the nanoseconds have slowly diminished over the years to the point where they are now basically immeasurable. In addition, the neck-snapping caused by the old F1 gearbox is gone. All you're left with is a constant acceleration accompanied by a sweet-sounding bark between shifts.

Other Ferraris have had "launch-control" systems, but those were nothing more than a way to quickly smoke away a few hundred dollars' worth of tire. The California has a true launch-control system. So how does it work? Turn the CST traction control off, foot on brake, launch button pressed, wait for the beep, and then mat the gas. When the revs hit around 3000 rpm, lift off the brake. All you need do now is just hang on and keep the car pointed straight. The California's new transmission, set up in launch mode, auto upshifts for you until you run out of gears. So what does she run? We got 3.5 seconds to 60, while the quarter mile ticked away in 11.9 seconds at 117.4 mph. That's damned impressive for a car weighing 3916 pounds with only 454 horsepower.

To me, it looks like a mess--every few inches, a new design feature is starting, stopping, changing from convex to concave, etc. Maybe it looks better in person.15 photos in your gallery (and 5 in the October '09 issue), and EVERY photo has the top up?? Was there an electrical issue with the test car?To me, the photos are very boring and look like someone snapped them with their BlackBerry--where's Julia LaPalme when you need her?

2 tons? WTF? How many fat ugly GT's has Ferrari rolled in the Last 3 years? Let's see, the 612, the 599, and now the "California". I'm tired of seeing all these overweight cars. For me, the 575m is the quintessential Ferrari GT. Yes it was heavy at 3800 lbs, but it was beautiful. This is not. It's not pretty. In any case, this thing is FAST, and I can't believe that 2 tons can move like that. I would've expected times more in 4.3 range to 60, and 12.5 in the 1/4. However, I still hate it.

freshseth83 you are an idiot..... why is it that when any new performance car comes out idiots like freshseth83 have to bring up the GTR? True it is a phenomenal vehicle but some people actually value heritage, design and quality. I'll admit I wasn't excited by the complete notion of a Hollywood cruiser but wow was i wrong! Gorgeous car!

Not pretty from all angles, but it is gorgeous from many. Add on that performance for such a relatively low price and that's a nice little Ferrari. But then again, it reminds me of the 599 in the way it leans through corners. Yes, I know, it weighs as much as a minivan, but to me that kills it. With that amount of weight throwing those types of numbers on the skidpad, I think it's too much technology from where I'm sitting. Give me a pure Ferrari and not a Evo-GTR-599.

This Ferrari is killer! My Impala has a 502 cubic inch crate motor with a Wieland supercharger putting out 630 horses. Wieghs 4100lbs and my best time was 11.8 at 118mph.This car is a little less than 200 lbs lighter and has 176 less horses and I can only beat it by one tenth of a second. I am impressed, and now I have to try harder.Of course my car cost less, and I had to do it all myself,but these guys really got alot of power to the ground and that's kick butt mechanic work! Rock on Italy! Your Tecks have my respect!

i can think of another 3800-3900 pound car that gets to 60 in 3.5 seconds of less, it's called the Nissan GTR. it's a 3rd of the price too, definately not a ferrari but definately it's performance equal.

Not to diss on the Nissan 370Z, but it doesn't even belong in the same sentence as a Ferrari. As for my personal opinion of the California, I'll admit it; at first, I thought this car was ugly and too slow. I've seen this car in person, and let me tell you--it looks beautiful. It's also a lot quicker than I had originally thought it would be (3.5 sec 0-60? Nice!) and I love the retractable hardtop and gorgeous interior. When/if I get rich, I'm buying one.

Wow, what a great car. Funny thing is when the design and ideas for the california came out many people disliked or even hated the idea of this very different italian car. Good to see Ferarri proved them wrong. The craziest thing about it all though is how similiar it is to the new 370z. Everything from the design cues to handling and stopping power are reminiscent of Motortrend's testing of the jap beast. There are obviously some differences such as v8 instead of v6, hand built vs assembly in Japan, and of course $190,000+ vs $35K. Yet, the Ferrari is it's reminiscent Italian counterpart. Especially the thrills both will give drivers